I think it's more about how and why they oppose things, rather than what it is that they oppose.
Hippies are all about 'love', and creating their own society, separated from the rest of the world.
Punks are more of a 'working class', 'urban' nature, and want to change society, using aggression and violence if necessary, rather than love.
Hippies are more into 'buddhist anarchism'.

Is there some truth that both groups have a reputation for being hygiene-averse, or that their relative lifestyles don't lend themselves to frequent showers? I'm only being semi-facetious - it's another thing that suggests similarity or circumstances and / or ethos.

Well, I wouldn't know. My uncle was a hippie, but his personal hygiene was as good as average people during his hippie days --certainly not hygiene-averse.

Anyway, there were days where I though punks were uncouth, aggressive young people who'd like to harass other people, with pins and needles sticking out everywhere. But then again, WolverineDK is a nice and polite person, and also a good friend. Turned out he is also a punk, so I guess we are indeed wrong about punks being violent and aggressive --a stereotype promoted by movies like Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior. I believe we should refrain from making negative stereotypes about people.

But wait, the thread tittle is a stereotype --it stereotypes that all punks hate hippies, while the truth isn't necessarily so. I should have changed it accordingly, then.

It's more of a generational thing. *Some* punks saw hippies as too wishy-washy, detached from 'real life', and (ultimately) as a failed rebellion that has been successfully co-opted and 'neutered' by the mainstream. Of course the same thing also happened to punk itself in due time, because that's the way of the world.

But yep, it's a generalization. Maybe "hate" is largely incorrect, since the two movements didn't share a huge temporal overlap, but punk sure liked to lampoon hippie-dom (cf. Cockney Rejects, "Flares & Slippers, Oi!"). OTOH, common ground is possible (albeit rare) - both hippies and punks would enjoy a good Hawkwind concert. 😁

I see. Well, eventually all subcultures will be commercialized pop cultures, will they not?

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

I see. Well, eventually all subcultures will be commercialized pop cultures, will they not?

Still waiting for the demoscene to become commercialized pop culture 😀

Scali wrote:

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

I see. Well, eventually all subcultures will be commercialized pop cultures, will they not?

Still waiting for the demoscene to become commercialized pop culture 😀

I too fear, that the demo-scene will be a commercialised pop culture, but then again . Just look at this, which is a sad case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbaland_plagi … ism_controversy

Hell it seems to me, that other hip hop "artists" are already beginning to be inspired by both 8bit and 16 chip tunes too sadly 😒

If your uncle didn't stink, then he wasn't a real hippie.

WolverineDK wrote:

I too fear, that the demo-scene will be a commercialised pop culture, but then again . Just look at this, which is a sad case. […]
Show full quote

Scali wrote:

Still waiting for the demoscene to become commercialized pop culture 😀

I too fear, that the demo-scene will be a commercialised pop culture, but then again . Just look at this, which is a sad case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbaland_plagi … ism_controversy

Hell it seems to me, that other hip hop "artists" are already beginning to be inspired by both 8bit and 16 chip tunes too sadly 😒

What the.....

Average people were accused to infringe copyright belongs to big-time record labels, and they were strongarmed and blackmailed to pay exorbitant settlement fee.

Big-time record producer obviously infringed copyright belongs to average people, and the big-time producer just walked away scot-free.

What kind of world we're living in?

Often when it comes to civil law, pay to play.

gdjacobs wrote:

Often when it comes to civil law, pay to play.

Doesn't copyright violation fall into criminal law category?

Usually copyright violation is treated as a breach of terms. In some cases (such as the Sklyarov case), cases go criminal, although that case was not about copyright violation.

Everyone hates hippies. Damn hippies...

Punks (late 70s and 80s) were a reaction against hippies (60s and early 70s). They basically did everything the opposite of hippies, just because.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Hippies are anti-establishment and anti status quo, and so are punks.

They used to be back in the day when society as a whole hadn't fully gone a whoring after the Godless, socialistic depravity that's consuming the world as we type. The hippies and punks of today are pro-establishment because the establishment itself has become vile, and vile people are drawn towards vile things.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Hippies don't like capitalism, and neither do punk.

They don't even know what capitalism is because they're on dope most of the time and can't seem to find a motivation to remain sober and try to understand anything at all.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Hippies tend to be socialists (anarcho-socialist), and so are punks.

Hippies have strong DIY culture, and so do punks.

Socialists are parasites, they don't do anything productive and actually leech from the DIY crowd; you can't have it both ways.